Jump to content

Recommended Posts

During the first leeward rounding of our Capri 25 one design regatta we had some interesting contact with a boat that had to give us right of way and inside mark room.  I think next time we come in on Starboard we will hail "Starboard and Inside" and not "Inside overlap".  I am interested what kind of rules discussion this video sparks.  And it is too funny not to share.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Remodel said:

To whom are you calling "Overlap." Or perhaps it's not you, but at the beginning of the video I can't see an overlap anywhere.

Yeah, I see a boat with no overlap driving between two other boats, a classic no-no.

Also, giving up 4+ boat lengths letting the mainsail luff after rounding, and not getting weight up... not championship material IMHO

FB- Doug

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Remodel said:

To whom are you calling "Overlap." Or perhaps it's not you, but at the beginning of the video I can't see an overlap anywhere.

I think that was maybe a function of camera distortion. I thought I heard the bow guy say "overlap" shortly before the skipper hailed. And given the time elapsed from the hail to the mark it's pretty clear the overlap was established outside the zone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Assuming there was an overlap upon entering the zone it doesn’t matter what youyou hailed- rule 18 has no hailing requirement. It’s good practice, but not a formal requirement.  Hailing anything about starboard suggests a deeper misunderstanding though- port and starboard have nothing to do with room at a Leeward mark. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Davidasailor26 said:

Assuming there was an overlap upon entering the zone it doesn’t matter what youyou hailed- rule 18 has no hailing requirement. It’s good practice, but not a formal requirement.  Hailing anything about starboard suggests a deeper misunderstanding though- port and starboard have nothing to do with room at a Leeward mark. 

OP also lost starboard when he gybed and became windward keep clear on the outside boat - but (assuming an overlap at the zone) still entitled to mark-room.

I agree non-required hails (if done professionally) are helpful, both to let the other fellow know what your assessment of the situation is and as a useful "marker" if you do wind up in the room.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a Gate not a Mark. 

18.4 Gybing 
When an inside overlapped right-of-way boat must gybe at a mark to sail her proper course, until she gybes she shall sail no farther from the mark than needed to sail that course. Rule 18.4 does not apply at a gate mark

Since 18.4 does not apply, Port Starboard does.  We are entitled to both right of way and mark room on the port boat (Fat Boys) but have to give mark room to the starboard boat inside of us (Maverick) that got to the zone before us with no overlap. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Sea Dog MN said:

This is a Gate not a Mark. 

18.4 Gybing 
When an inside overlapped right-of-way boat must gybe at a mark to sail her proper course, until she gybes she shall sail no farther from the mark than needed to sail that course. Rule 18.4 does not apply at a gate mark

Since 18.4 does not apply, Port Starboard does.  We are entitled to both right of way and mark room on the port boat (Fat Boys) but have to give mark room to the starboard boat inside of us (Maverick) that got to the zone before us with no overlap. 

But before you got to the mark you gybed onto port (at about 0:41). So 10 was off and 11 determined ROW with Fat Boys (he was then leeward), but your entitlement to mark-room under 18.2(b) remained.

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, random. said:

No call is required.

There may have been overlap on the boat to starboard if a line drawn across his transom intersected with the bow of the camera boat two boat-lengths from the mark.   Hard to tell.

But the collision from behinf, from a boat not seen in the video?

No mystery about who was at fault there.

You have no clue what "mark room" means, do you?

A boat taking mark room to which she has rights cannot be run into, even from behind. Conversely, if the camera boat does not have mark room (as I believe) then she is in the wrong to even be there interfering with the other boats' rounding, collision or no.

FB- Doug

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, European Bloke said:

I'd start by going away and reading what you should hail, cos the 8 year old Oppie kids know you're going to have a short stint in the room with 'inside overlap'.

There's no rule that says what he 'should' hail.  There's no rule that says that he should or must hail at all.

2 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:
2 hours ago, Remodel said:

To whom are you calling "Overlap." Or perhaps it's not you, but at the beginning of the video I can't see an overlap anywhere.

Yeah,

Boats on opposite tacks close together running downwind:  they're overlapped more likely than not.

In any case that's what he's claiming, and given there's no denial from Fatboys, there appears to be no doubt that they are overlapped.

That's how an overlap hail before the zone from an inside boat works.

2 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

Yeah, I see a boat with no overlap driving between two other boats, a classic no-no.

C'mon Doug,

Initially not at the zone, port (Fatboys) and starboard (POV), with another starboard tacker to leeward

  • POV is right of way on Fatboys
  • the starboard tacker to leeward is right of way on both POV and Fatboys, so is an obstruction:  Fatboys is required to give POV room to pass between her and the obstruction.

As long as Fatboys isn't clear ahead at the zone, which she pretty obviously isn't, POV has every right to go in there and, when the first of them reaches the zone, to have mark-room from Fatboys.

1 hour ago, Davidasailor26 said:

 Hailing anything about starboard suggests a deeper misunderstanding though- port and starboard have nothing to do with room at a Leeward mark. 

But it has quite a lot to do with Fatboys obligations before POV gybes.

1 hour ago, random. said:

two boat-lengths from the mark

Team racing are we?

55 minutes ago, inneedofadvice said:

The contact was from behind. No brainer isn’t it?

Pretty much.

Only way it wouldn't be would be if Fatboys reached the zone clear ahead of POV and was entitled to mark-room, then POV somehow miraculously got ahead of Fatboys.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Brass said:

There's no rule that says what he 'should' hail.  There's no rule that says that he should or must hail at all.

Boats on opposite tacks close together running downwind:  they're overlapped more likely than not.

In any case that's what he's claiming, and given there's no denial from Fatboys, there appears to be no doubt that they are overlapped.

That's how an overlap hail before the zone from an inside boat works.

C'mon Doug,

Initially not at the zone, port (Fatboys) and starboard (POV), with another starboard tacker to leeward

  • POV is right of way on Fatboys
  • the starboard tacker to leeward is right of way on both POV and Fatboys, so is an obstruction:  Fatboys is required to give POV room to pass between her and the obstruction.

As long as Fatboys isn't clear ahead at the zone, which she pretty obviously isn't, POV has every right to go in there and, when the first of them reaches the zone, to have mark-room from Fatboys.

But it has quite a lot to do with Fatboys obligations before POV gybes.

Team racing are we?

Pretty much.

Only way it wouldn't be would be if Fatboys reached the zone clear ahead of POV and was entitled to mark-room, then POV somehow miraculously got ahead of Fatboys.

A diagram would help a lot.

To me, looking at the angle of the transom of the port-tack boat at far right at the beginning of the video, I'm doubtful there is an overlap. Certainly they have an overlap on the boat immediately to the camera-boat's port, who enters the incident as leeward and definitely has mark room.

The boat to the right of the frame isn't being particularly well sailed. He seems to be more interested in a yelling match with the other boat, and nearly parks it, as well as not doing a very good take-down (no relevance in the rules) and neither appearing to give way to two starboard boats nor give mark room. It may be that his intention was to take the twos boats' sterns and gain an inside lane exiting the rounding. I've done this lots of times. But you need to not hit the other boats and you need to have speed on tap, which it doesn't look like he does.

In the last half of the video, the boat that started out on the inside/left/to port of the camera boat has gained significantly to windward.

Anyway, if there's no overlap between the camera boat and the baot to the right (presumably the one who hit camera boat's stern), then the camera boat owes her mark room and is in the wrong: R18.2-b. It's arguable she was not keeping clear, although it looks like the camera boat made no alteration of course to avoid her. The collision occurs after the gybe, so if the camera boat does have overlap and mark room, then she's in the right.

FB- Doug

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

A diagram would help a lot.

Not necessarily.  A diagram doesn't prove anything per se.  It only represents what the author thought was the facts, that he thought were relevant.

7 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

To me, looking at the angle of the transom of the port-tack boat at far right at the beginning of the video, I'm doubtful there is an overlap. Certainly they have an overlap on the boat immediately to the camera-boat's port, who enters the incident as leeward and definitely has mark room.

There's intuitive perception for you.

At the start of the video, no doubt LS is clear ahead, and when POV hails Fatboys @13 sec maybe she's overlapped on POV, maybe not:  doesn't matter for her: she gets mark-room either way.

Unlike you, I'm inclined to think that POV is overlapped on Fatboys, at least at the time POV hails.

So we'd need to hear the evidence of the parties and witnesses in the room.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Anyway, if there's no overlap between the camera boat and the bait to the right (presumably the one who hit camera boat's stern), then the camera boat owes her mark room and is in the wrong: R18.2-b.

Yup, if Fatboys was clear ahead when she reached the zone, she has markroom, even if POV thereafter draws clear ahead of her.

16 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

It's arguable she was not keeping clear,

Who?  POV?  it's a bow to transom shunt.  That's rule 12, Fatboys, clear astern does not keep clear of POV clear ahead.  Nothing arguable about it.

16 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

although it looks like the camera boat made no alteration of course to avoid her.

There's precious little a clear ahead boat can do to avoid contact with a boat that hits her transom.

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Brass said:
Quote

It's arguable she was not keeping clear,

Who?  POV?  it's a bow to transom shunt.  That's rule 12, Fatboys, clear astern does not keep clear of POV clear ahead.  Nothing arguable about it.

Well, sure. It's one more thing on top of not giving mark room. Fatboys is the boat to the right of view as the incident begins? She's failing to give mark room -and- not keeping clear of a boat ahead.

Unless of course, she was clear ahead and had mark room over the POV (camera) boat. In which case, what, offsetting penalties? I was under the impression sailing doesn't work like that. If POV sailed into a spot she has no right to be in, then she's failing at giving mark room.

FB- Doug

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Unless of course, she was clear ahead and had mark room over the POV (camera) boat. In which case, what, offsetting penalties? I was under the impression sailing doesn't work like that. If POV sailed into a spot she has no right to be in, then she's failing at giving mark room.

No not offsetting penalties.

We do the exoneration process.

First conclude which boat(s) did not keep clear and broke a Section A rule.

Next conclude whether any boat was required to give room or mark-room, and did she give it.

Then conclude whether any boat that did not keep clear was entitled to mark-room and whether she was sailing within the room or mark-room to which she was entitled 

If a boat sailing within the room or mark-room to which she is entitled does not keep clear, she is exonerated for that breach by rule 43.1(b).

Then you do contact,  bearing in mind that if there's a failure to give room or mark-room, this is usually proved by contact (or a mark touch). If there's contact with a boat entitled to room, that usually necessarily means that it was not reasonably possible for her to avoid the contact and that she did not break rule 14.  Unless there's a third boat or another obstruction in the play, it usually will be reasonably possible for a boat required to give room or mark-room to avoid contact and she will break rule 14.

Lastly, if a boat has broken rule 14, you do exoneration for no injury or damage under rule 43.1(c).

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, inneedofadvice said:

As there was no red flag displayed, no protest, it doesn’t matter who had rights. The boat was hit from behind=fouled. 

Until there is contact I agree that no protest by the outside boat would mean POV did nothing illegal. Even if POV didn’t have an overlap and had to give the outside boat mark room, she can still sail inside if the outside boat is not forcing her away. See case 63 - “When a boat voluntarily or unintentionally makes space between herself and a mark available to another that has no right to such space, the other boat may take advantage, at her own risk, of the space. The risk the other boat takes is that the boat entitled to mark-room may be able to close the gap between herself and the mark while sailing her proper course. In that case, the boat entitled to mark-room is exonerated by rule 43.1(b) if she breaks a rule of Section A or rule 15 or 16, and only rule 14 will limit her course if she makes a rapid and aggressive attempt to close the gap between herself and the mark.”

So until there was contact POV was just sailing in the space made available to her unintentionally, at her own risk.
 

But the contact means someone failed to comply with a rule. The above case says Outside is exonerated for sailing up POV’s stern (provided she doesn’t cause damage/injury, so she can be exonerated for the rule 14 violation by rule 43.1). The fact that Outside was able to cause contact while still inside the zone means POV didn’t give the room Outside was entitled to, so POV was wrong (the risk she assumed by sailing into the room to which she wasn’t entitled). She might not be penalized if Outside didn’t protest, but she still violated a rule.

Of course all the above still assumes there was no overlap coming into the zone. If there was then POV has room the whole way through and Outside failed to give that room. POV clearly did protest, so Outside should be penalized if there was an overlap.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, random. said:

No call is required.

There may have been overlap on the boat to starboard if a line drawn across his transom intersected with the bow of the camera boat two boat-lengths from the mark.   Hard to tell.

  

Thought it was 3 boat lengths now. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Davidasailor26 said:

Until there is contact I agree that no protest by the outside boat would mean POV did nothing illegal. Even if POV didn’t have an overlap and had to give the outside boat mark room, she can still sail inside if the outside boat is not forcing her away. See case 63 - “When a boat voluntarily or unintentionally makes space between herself and a mark available to another that has no right to such space, the other boat may take advantage, at her own risk, of the space.  ..."

 

At her own risk = if it turns out that the other DOES take up that space, then she is DSQ.

You don't just sail into an empty gap, with other boats having rights over you, and say "Ah well that gap was empty when I first sailed in there." All OK, thanks very much, be off now. "At her risk" means that any foul in this incident is going to be laid at her doorstep, so to speak.

FB- Doug

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Davidasailor26 said:

Until there is contact I agree that no protest by the outside boat would mean POV did nothing illegal.

That's not right.

All that it means is that the no other boat has taken the first step necessary for a valid protest.

You certainly cannot infer anything about whether a rule has been broken from that.

Quote

Even if POV didn’t have an overlap and had to give the outside boat mark room, she can still sail inside if the outside boat is not forcing her away. See case 63 -

“When a boat voluntarily or unintentionally makes space between herself and a mark available to another that has no right to such space, the other boat may take advantage, at her own risk, of the space. The risk the other boat takes is that the boat entitled to mark-room may be able to close the gap between herself and the mark while sailing her proper course. In that case, the boat entitled to mark-room is exonerated by rule 43.1(b) if she breaks a rule of Section A or rule 15 or 16, and only rule 14 will limit her course if she makes a rapid and aggressive attempt to close the gap between herself and the mark.”

So until there was contact POV was just sailing in the space made available to her unintentionally, at her own risk.

I don't think this looks anything like Case 63, the room given room taken case.  There is never enough space for POV, supposing she was required to give mark-room, to even try to get around the mark in side Fatboys, once Fatboys starts sailing to the mark and around it.

There doesn't have to be contact for a late inside boat to fail to give mark-room:  if the boat entitled to mark-room is sailing within the mark-room to which she is entitled, say, to the mark, and is forced to change course to avoid the boat required to give mark-room, then mark-room has not been given.

Quote

But the contact means someone failed to comply with a rule. The above case says Outside is exonerated for sailing up POV’s stern (provided she doesn’t cause damage/injury, so she can be exonerated for the rule 14 violation by rule 43.1). The fact that Outside was able to cause contact while still inside the zone means POV didn’t give the room Outside was entitled to, so POV was wrong (the risk she assumed by sailing into the room to which she wasn’t entitled). She might not be penalized if Outside didn’t protest, but she still violated a rule.

Just be careful about 'cause'.

  • for rule 43.1(c) exoneration, it's not that either boat has to cause or not cause damage:  it's enough that the contact caused damage.
  • if Fatboys had been entitled to mark-room and had "caused" contact, that is to say intentionally caused contact, 'tagged' POV, that would be deliberately breaking rule 14, whether exonerated or not, and would be travelling towards rule 2.
Quote

Of course all the above still assumes there was no overlap coming into the zone. If there was then POV has room the whole way through and Outside failed to give that room. POV clearly did protest, so Outside should be penalized if there was an overlap.

 

Yup, and POV's uncontradicted hail just before boats were at the zone is the starting point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Brass said:

for rule 43.1(c) exoneration, it's not that either boat has to cause or not cause damage:  it's enough that the contact caused damage

And in this incident there was damage, a broken brush shaft. Would have to ask the helmsman (or his significant other) if anything rose to the level of injury. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/29/2021 at 3:55 PM, TJSoCal said:

So what was the upshot of this incident? Did Fat Boy do turns? Was there a hearing? Decision?

they did not do their penalty turn.  We accepted their 40% penalty in arbitration.  There was no disagreement we had overlap before entering and maintained overlap while entering the 3 boat-length zone.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Couple of points

RRS 18.2(e) No one mentioned this in the discussion. Was the overlap established 3 boat lengths from the mark or not? (Not 2 boat lengths Random)

61.1 (a) states the boat will HAIL protest not just little more than mumble it  

The contact came at 0.48. The word protest was spoken (judging by the different volume the mic was picking up) at 1.03 - 15 seconds later.

Strictly speaking protest invalid as 15 seconds later in those conditions with light contact is clearly NOT "the first reasonable opportunity"

Just being Devil's Advocate

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sea Dog MN said:

they did not do their penalty turn.  We accepted their 40% penalty in arbitration.  There was no disagreement we had overlap before entering and maintained overlap while entering the 3 boat-length zone.

This is always one of those where I stand back and ask why.

Why accept their 40% if they admit fault and didn't take a penalty? Make em hurt for being stupid. Two turns would have been quick and clean here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Roller Skates said:

This is always one of those where I stand back and ask why.

Why accept their 40% if they admit fault and didn't take a penalty? Make em hurt for being stupid. Two turns would have been quick and clean here.

I think part of the issue here might be that in a situation like this it may take a few minutes for a boat to look back, review what they remember of the incident and decide whether they think they may have broken a rule or not.

Was Fat Boy sure she wasn't entitled to mark room? How sure? Keeping in mind that we all got to watch the incident on video several times and it still took some debate to sort it out, Fat Boy had to make the call in real time while continuing to sail. 

If you take more than a minute or so to sort that out in your mind mind you've forfeited your right to a turns penalty - even if you spin the other boat can still press her protest and get you disqualified. 

Curious why this OA decided to up the post-race penalty to 40% from the standard 30%? Seems like the higher you make the arbitration penalty the more you encourage a boat to take her chances in the room. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, TJSoCal said:

I think part of the issue here might be that in a situation like this it may take a few minutes for a boat to look back, review what they remember of the incident and decide whether they think they may have broken a rule or not

Which is the beauty of Post Race Penalties (PRP)  under Appendix T.  When a competitor has had a think about the facts and a chance to check the rule book,  they can put themselves in the right voluntarily.   That's good for sportsmanship. 

Quote

Was Fat Boy sure she wasn't entitled to mark room? How sure? Keeping in mind that we all got to watch the incident on video several times and it still took some debate to sort it out, Fat Boy had to make the call in real time while continuing to sail.

She was sure the moment she didn't respond "No Overlap" to POVs first hail.

Had she done so there would have been reasonable doubt, rule 18.2(e) would have applied and it would be presumed that POV had not obtained her overlap in time. 

That's the way hails approaching a mark work.

Quote

If you take more than a minute or so to sort that out in your mind mind you've forfeited your right to a turns penalty - even if you spin the other boat can still press her protest and get you disqualified. 

Not necessarily.  If Appendix T is on you can still take a PRP voluntarily  or after arbitration.

Quote

Curious why this OA decided to up the post-race penalty to 40% from the standard 30%? Seems like the higher you make the arbitration penalty the more you encourage a boat to take her chances in the room. 

Tough on crime bs.

Some OA/RC like to up the ante from 30% for a voluntarily PRP before arbitration, or sometimes the PTL, to 40% after that.  I think that just unnecessarily complicates things.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Brass said:

She was sure the moment she didn't respond "No Overlap" to POVs first hail.

Had she done so there would have been reasonable doubt, rule 18.2(e) would have applied and it would be presumed that POV had not obtained her overlap in time. 

That's the way hails approaching a mark work.

Well maybe. But suppose Fat Boy comes to arbitration or a protest hearing and says that she’s sure she was clear ahead at the zone. She didn’t hail because she doesn’t make non-required hails. She came up at the mark because she was ROW and entitled to mark-room. She didn’t do turns because she was exonerated (wasn’t aware of the damage) and OP should be DSQ for sailing into mark-room she wasn’t entitled to.

In this case it didn’t go that way, but it could have. Even with the video we have, clearly the previous discussion indicates that there could be reasonable doubt whether an overlap was established in time unless both parties agree.

And my point about turns penalties is that if you hesitate for a minute or so to figure out if you should spin or not, you may as well not spin because it may not count (not “as soon after the incident as possible”). Although personally I think if I was protesting someone and they did turns within a few minutes of the incident I’d probably take my flag down.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, TJSoCal said:

 Although personally I think if I was protesting someone and they did turns within a few minutes of the incident I’d probably take my flag down.

I think that's true of most of us, as long as the outcome is reasonably fair most sailors I know don't try to push the limits on this, in part because they want their ultimate victory to mean something.

In most incidents it take a short time to get clear properly anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, JohnMB said:
1 hour ago, TJSoCal said:

Although personally I think if I was protesting someone and they did turns within a few minutes of the incident I’d probably take my flag down.

I think that's true of most of us, as long as the outcome is reasonably fair most sailors I know don't try to push the limits on this, in part because they want their ultimate victory to mean something.

In most incidents it take a short time to get clear properly anyway.

There are two different wordings in the rules, for two different purposes. Neither of those say "absolutely instantaneously" but that is often the interpretation; lots of perfectly valid protests (IMHO) get thrown out because the protestor didn't display a flag at the speed of light.

FB- Doug

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would love to hear some testimony from the RC anchored off to port in the vid. Many people forget they can call the RC as a witness.
This is also a classic place for the RC and Yacht Club to have a drone flying and get some great video. One of these days sailing may wake up and learn how to market their events.

Fat Boy really screwed the pooch. They should have hung off to stbd and let Mav and the butt brush guy f with each other. Then Fat Boy could have come in with speed and probably rolled them both with a better rounding and pointing high.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, TJSoCal said:
On 10/2/2021 at 3:48 PM, Brass said:

She was sure the moment she didn't respond "No Overlap" to POVs first hail.

Had she done so there would have been reasonable doubt, rule 18.2(e) would have applied and it would be presumed that POV had not obtained her overlap in time. 

That's the way hails approaching a mark work.

Well maybe. But suppose Fat Boy comes to arbitration or a protest hearing and says that she’s sure she was clear ahead at the zone. She didn’t hail because she doesn’t make non-required hails. She came up at the mark because she was ROW and entitled to mark-room. She didn’t do turns because she was exonerated (wasn’t aware of the damage) and OP should be DSQ for sailing into mark-room she wasn’t entitled to.

In this case it didn’t go that way, but it could have. Even with the video we have, clearly the previous discussion indicates that there could be reasonable doubt whether an overlap was established in time unless both parties agree.

Then, sure the protest committee would need to take some evidence, including what POV and Fatboy actually saw, heard, tasted, smelt etc, not just what they thought or 'were sure of', because, bet your bottom dollar POV in the room is going to say that he was 'sure' they were overlapped.

Maybe POV will bring along this "int'l Judge" and his very strange Casebook 

 

And most of the speculation and debate in this thread has been based on some out of position video.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:
12 hours ago, JohnMB said:
12 hours ago, TJSoCal said:

Although personally I think if I was protesting someone and they did turns within a few minutes of the incident I’d probably take my flag down.

I think that's true of most of us, as long as the outcome is reasonably fair most sailors I know don't try to push the limits on this, in part because they want their ultimate victory to mean something.

In most incidents it take a short time to get clear properly anyway.

There are two different wordings in the rules, for two different purposes. Neither of those say "absolutely instantaneously" but that is often the interpretation; lots of perfectly valid protests (IMHO) get thrown out because the protestor didn't display a flag at the speed of light.

Exactly what wordings are you referring to Doug?

My experience, outside sailing, is that when you come across anything like "promptly", "immediately", "as soon as possible" or "at the first reasonable oppotunity", if you substitute "without unreasonable delay", and test against that, you'll probably get the right answer.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Brass said:

Exactly what wordings are you referring to Doug?

My experience, outside sailing, is that when you come across anything like "promptly", "immediately", "as soon as possible" or "at the first reasonable oppotunity", if you substitute "without unreasonable delay", and test against that, you'll probably get the right answer.

Specifically, when taking a one- or two-turn penalty,  the rules prescribe "as soon after the incident as possible." (R44.2)

Pretty clear, a wait-and-see attitude is not what they are talking about, nor continuing to race and doing the turns at the most advantageous time (such as when you are about to tack anyway).

When protesting another boat, it says to inform the protestee "at the first reasonable opportunity," which was explained at the judges course I took years ago to mean 'does not replace or supplant other important actions that may be ongoing, such as setting or dousing the spinnaker.' OTOH it also not appropriate to continue sailing while debating whether or not to protest, and/or tell the crew to bring up the protest flag next time they go below to fetch a beer.

FB- Doug

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/2/2021 at 7:50 AM, Brass said:

See post immediately above.

Overlap was not disputed in arbitration.

I hear the word "protest" at 52 sec 4 sec after the contact. 

The arbitrator was obviously satisfied about validity. 

Yep - missed that because even the mic hardly picked it up. if the guy had 'hailed' a taxi at that volume he would be standing on the street corner for a while. Remember words in the rules "are used in the sense ordinarily understood in nautical or general use"  See RRS Introduction

 

18 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

There are two different wordings in the rules, for two different purposes. Neither of those say "absolutely instantaneously" but that is often the interpretation; lots of perfectly valid protests (IMHO) get thrown out because the protestor didn't display a flag at the speed of light.

FB- Doug

Thrown out incorrectly Doug. The wording is first REASONABLE opportunity. Many elements can cause a REASONABLE delay "Have you damaged my boat? Anyone hurt? , avoiding further contact etc etc "Shock" for crissake.

When taking a penalty many interpretet the rule as "when others get out of my way I will take the penalty" - WRONG The rule says "After getting well clear...." The onus is on the wrong doer to get out of the way AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. That might even mean letting the sails lose to slow down to create a large enough gap to do their turn(s). It is quite unequivocal yet I have heard it many times "There were too many boats around"

I actually was told by one Olympic coach that if his sailor had taken their turns before the windward mark it would have been in an adverse current but by waiting until after rounding the mark then doing the turns it would be in a favourable current - over 20 seconds after the sailor had been protested. What part of "as soon as possible" doesn't he fucking understand

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, danstanford said:

Having watched it a couple of times, I cannot imagine there is a question of overlap with Fatboy. What am I missing? 

People's intuitive perception from the video differ quite a bit.

The video is pretty poor evidence about overlap

Try diagramming the positions of the boats.

Consider where an umpire wing boat would have to be to call the overlap.

Consider the angle between the axis of the lens and other boats and the problems of judging distance alone the axis of the lens.

POVs skippers binocular observation and judgement is better evidence than the video.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why the fuck would you carry a spinnaker in light air between two other boats just before you are about to round a mark? It would be one thing if you were using it as part of the boat to work the overlap rules, obviously this wasn't the case. If you had dropped the chute earlier you might have been able to work around them with increased speed and/or maneuverability.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CaptainAhab said:

Why the fuck would you carry a spinnaker in light air between two other boats just before you are about to round a mark? It would be one thing if you were using it as part of the boat to work the overlap rules, obviously this wasn't the case. If you had dropped the chute earlier you might have been able to work around them with increased speed and/or maneuverability.  

Welcome to PHRF racing in the USA.

FB- Doug

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/3/2021 at 6:28 AM, Steam Flyer said:

There are two different wordings in the rules, for two different purposes. Neither of those say "absolutely instantaneously" but that is often the interpretation; lots of perfectly valid protests (IMHO) get thrown out because the protestor didn't display a flag at the speed of light.

 

10 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

Specifically, when taking a one- or two-turn penalty,  the rules prescribe "as soon after the incident as possible." (R44.2)

Pretty clear, a wait-and-see attitude is not what they are talking about, nor continuing to race and doing the turns at the most advantageous time (such as when you are about to tack anyway).

When protesting another boat, it says to inform the protestee "at the first reasonable opportunity," which was explained at the judges course I took years ago to mean 'does not replace or supplant other important actions that may be ongoing, such as setting or dousing the spinnaker.' OTOH it also not appropriate to continue sailing while debating whether or not to protest, and/or tell the crew to bring up the protest flag next time they go below to fetch a beer.

Thanks Doug.

There are some US Appeals that are very relevant.

Note that Appeal 61 indicates that in the eyes of your Appeals Committee there is no inherent difference between the two forms of words you quoted. But, while specifically addressing hail of "Protest",  it is highly relevant to taking penalties.

Rule 44.1, Penalties at the Time of an Incident: Taking a Penalty
Rule 44.2, Penalties at the Time of an Incident: One-Turn and Two-Turns Penalties
Flying Scot 36 vs. Flying Scot 92
 
Rule 44.1 does not provide time for a boat to deliberate whether she has broken a rule. If a boat decides too late that she has broken a rule, the penalty provided by rule 44 is not available to her.
Rule 61.1, Protest Requirements: Informing the Protestee
Lido 14 4830 vs. Lido 14 4509

"First reasonable opportunity" means as soon as practicable, not as soon as convenient.
 
Rule 61.1(a), Protest Requirements: Informing the Protestee
635 vs. 2641
 
Failure to display a protest flag during a period of time when some member of the crew is not otherwise occupied is a failure to display it “at the first reasonable opportunity.” If a protest flag is not displayed at the first reasonable opportunity, the protest is invalid and the hearing must be closed.
 
Rule 61.1(a), Protest Requirements: Informing the Protestee
E Scow V-751 vs. E Scow M-9
 
A boat is not obligated to give priority to displaying a protest flag at the cost of the crew failing to act to keep the boat under control or delaying a spinnaker set.
 
Rule 61.1(a), Protest Requirements: Informing the Protestee
Sail 6 vs. White Flag and Gold Flag

The “first reasonable opportunity” to hail “Protest” is the first reasonable time after an incident when a boat is able to hail “Protest,” which is usually immediately
 
Rule 61.1(a), Protest Requirements: Informing the Protestee
Monfongo vs Fuzzy Logic

A protest flag flown 10–15 seconds after an incident when a member of the crew is able to retrieve and display the flag in that time and acts to do so is consistent with displaying the flag at the “first reasonable opportunity.”
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Brass said:
53 minutes ago, Steam Flyer said:

Welcome to PHRF racing in the USA.

Hey, this was

On 9/28/2021 at 3:00 PM, Sea Dog MN said:

Capri 25 one design regatta

 

Sincere apologies, I spotted that at the beginning and forgot.

FB- Doug

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

Welcome to PHRF racing in the USA.

FB- Doug

It's definitely not a J/22 or J/24 regatta. 

This clip is the very end of the longer clip. If you watch the previous 30 seconds. They could have dropped the chute before everyone else, potentially sailed faster under the leward boat. Pushed them up gained mark room and been in the lead. At the very least, they are idiots for sailing in between the other boats.

What did they use to "goose" that guy?

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/28/2021 at 9:04 PM, Steam Flyer said:

Well, sure. It's one more thing on top of not giving mark room. Fatboys is the boat to the right of view as the incident begins? She's failing to give mark room -and- not keeping clear of a boat ahead.

Unless of course, she was clear ahead and had mark room over the POV (camera) boat. In which case, what, offsetting penalties? I was under the impression sailing doesn't work like that. If POV sailed into a spot she has no right to be in, then she's failing at giving mark room.

FB- Doug

 

When I watched it I got the impression Fatboys was going for the right gate and had the inside overlap.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...